Hi all - I am a huge fan of using conditional moves to play more correspondence go over a shorter period of time. On OGS, however, there is a general consensus that the correspondence input board is another form of analysis board and that it should be disabled by default. I’ve avoided playing correspondence go on OGS largely as a consequence.
Here is the thread I am referencing: Disabling/Enabling Conditional Moves and Analysis should be independent selections
I also don’t want my opponent to play through positions, but can’t we come to some sort of compromise like limiting the branch of conditional move inputs to three or five moves? It would restore the functionality of conditional moves on the whole site while catering to the opinions shown in the thread above.
I agree with this, even though I don’t use conditional moves(I keep telling myself I should use them more). However I think it should be limited to one move, as anything more then that is pretty useless anyways. At least at my level, though maybe dans would benefit from more moves. So yeah, this should be a thing, but we might need to work out the move limit.
It’s a delicate balance. I have selected disable analysis in my account settings to force me to read properly… But I must admit I miss being able to condition moves, especially in forced exchanges where everyone plays the same moves every time.
wrong I’ve had sequences of 5-6 or even more conditional moves in the past, by myself as well as by my opponents.
can be especially handy for wrapping up end game.
True, I didn’t think about endgame, but other then that, I don’t see too much reason for too many moves.
I am also a fan of conditional moves.
I agree that such long sequences can be assimilated to analysis, as you have the option to cancel the whole sequence.
My suggestions as a compromise:
- limit the number of conditional moves, as suggested by @StrongDog (with 2 or 3 as a maximum)
- or lock a conditional move before you can submit the next conditional move (only cancel one level back)
I like the option of fully committing to a conditional move (no cancel available) just like you would any other stone played.
There are plenty of opening and middle game joseki that are 3-5 moves long.
I agree, but I think you should have to hit a button off the board to submit each conditional move. This way you get the same standard misclick prevention.
I see no reason this shouldn’t match whatever settings the player already has in effect for submitting moves (either single click, double click or “submit” button)
This is a really good idea. Just upvoting it
I use conditional moves a lot. I would like them to remain in the game. It saves a lot of time. I do not see any benefit to limiting it.
You have misunderstood. We are discussing a way to increase the usage of conditional moves by finding a fair way to enable them in games where analysis is disabled. They are currently completely disabled in such games.
I’m sorry to be boring but I disable analysis on all of my challenges. I don’t accept general challenges because of the risk of analysis being enabled. This excludes ladder games, but fair enough, and yes, I do use the feature for such games.
If conditional moves were available then I’d use them for analysis as well. It would make disabling analysis pointless unless conditional moves were, as has been suggested, locked in place.
Three things should be clear:
- That this unnecessarily complicates things. Really, if you want to use conditional moves, why not just seek or create challenges with analysis enabled?
- There will be people who misunderstand and accidentally lock in moves that they thought were just speculative. You will penalise a constant stream of misguided users and constantly be creating a feeling of frustration.
- It won’t work. I can just put in a conditional on A1 and A2 - where no one ever plays - and continue to use the conditional move feature as an analysis board.
Thank you for the clarification.
Not boring at all. Let’s respectfully discuss your points.
If conditional moves were made available then I’d use them for analysis as well
The solutions proposed keep the analysis feature locked and unavailable.
- It’s easy enough to read 3 moves deep without aids.
- Correspondence games have no time limit, and people with time on their hands can find ways to circumvent the system. example: print screen, print it on paper, and draw in such moves
- The benefits of speeding up forced exchanges far outweigh the costs.
That this unnecessarily complicates things. Really, if you want to use conditional moves, why not just seek or create challenges with analysis enabled?
I want conditional moves to be seen separately from analysis. Currently, the system locks the two together.
There will be people who misunderstand and accidentally lock in moves that they thought were just speculative. You will penalize a constant stream of misguided users and constantly be creating a feeling of frustration.
Locking trees to 3 moves deep removes this possibility. If the consensus is instead to lock moves and allow conditional moves to go as deep as needed (also a good option), a pop-up asking for confirmation can mitigate this.
It won’t work. I can just put in a conditional on A1 and A2 - where no one ever plays - and continue to use the conditional move feature as an analysis board.
The solutions proposed do not allow this.
Edit (10/19): For clarity
I truly love it when someone makes an argument, then acknowledges good points countering their argument. Bravo.